Part of the problem is we are using very poor language to talk about this- the debate seems to boil down to whether health care is a “right” and therefore anyone can demand it anywhere, under any circumstances, or it is a prviledge of those who can afford it.
When we accept that those are our only two choices, we put ourselves in a false dilemma- “rights” are so fixed, so ironclad, that the worries of free-market advocates are justified- is there no obligation for anyone to contribute to their own health care? That seems silly.
However, maybe health care is not a “right” but more of a societal good- if a person is indigent and in need of chemotherapy, are we prepared to simply watch them die? That is even more absurd.
Maybe we don’t have a legal obligation to provide free chemotherapy- yes, maybe it would be financially inefficient to do so- but providing a basic floor of essential health care only for those who truly can’t pay for it, like we already do with emergency room visits, would benefit society. A large percentage of bakruptcies are triggered by an uncovered illness; Communicable diseases can be caught and treated before they explode into pandemics, with taxpayer supported basic health care.
Think of schooling- Free schooling was not always popular, but the citizens of America discovered that providing education at the taxpayers expense gave back a benefit to the society at large- it isn’t an expense, it is an investment.
Make all the snarky comments you want about the public school system, but it is still a gem compared to 3rd world nations which have mobs of uneducated, unskilled people roaming the streets.
